ashp... spying on the citizens of the country, whether they are sunbathing in their back yard or farming as a business is still SPYING. Is there something about illegal search and seizure you don't understand? If they want to do what they do, GET A WARRANT!

ashp....So we're not people out here, is that how you see it? Not 'everyday citizens' just stupid inhumane rednecks. Hate to burst your bubble but we're people too and most farmers and ranchers manage their lagoons and animals just fine. There are many of us who are educated in the ways to best care for the earth and our livestock. Also, the obesity problem doesn't have anything to do with the availability of meat. It has to do with people who overindulge and don't prepare food in a healthy way. (Those with metabolic conditions aside).

XDm9mm and 4thgen-

I'll give you the Republican response to such gov't actions, "If you aren't doing anything wrong, why do you care?" I am sure that if this goes to SCOTUS the response from Alito and Scalia will be, "Its taking place in plain sight, no problem." Along with, "There is no right to privacy in the Constitution,"

ashp - Generally speaking, the land that livestock grazes on would not be suitable for growing vegetables for a variety of reasons. Just because someone lives in the place where they do business does not make it acceptable for ANYONE, government included, to just take pictures without warning or permission. Gee, you live next to the University that has agriculture as a major. How would you feel if there were suddenly photos of you in your kitchen picking your underwear out of your behind published on an EPA website because your home just happened to be next to the Agriculture area?

The government has been conducting fly overs to catch pot grower for years. Those flights include using (FLIR) forward looking infrared radar to detect pot grows inside a structure. Growing pot is illegal in most cases(until recently) and polluting is also illegal. So how are the two any different?

any rural homeowner who has a well for their drinking water understands the phosphate testing now required due to fertilizer runoff and saturation. This is no more unlawful than having the DEA do their aerial ultraviolet photos to find marijuana crops or the police using "sky-radar" to bust speeders. Farmers need to control their runoff and NONE would willingly admit that their manure pile is draining into a stream... NONE

Devil & davey - sounds good -- except that the millionaire cattle ranch owners contribute mega-bucks to their congressmen. Dope dealers don't. If the drug dealers hired a good lobby firm, they would be legal in a few years.

And anyway - animal urine and feces is 'natural'. So what is the issue. Bears have been dumping in the woods for years. Just because 50K head of cattle generates massive concentrated acidic liquids that poison the groundwater is not important. If it kills anyone - then the dead can sue (as they would be the only ones impacted). What is important is that the owners give to the republican cause...

Hummmmmmm The government uses aircraft to look for pot growers that are harmless ... why would anyone be alarmed that they would be looking for people that pollute our groundwater supply?

I live within 100 feet of a creek that empties into the Chesapeake Bay, two miles away and have to treat the water that flows off my roof and other impervious materials within the 100 foot RPA, Why wouldn't a farmer or industry protect his downstream waterways from his animal crap?

the fact is that cattle farms produce much more harmful waste and contaminants then do vegetable farms. seriously not debatable. these are stats. also a lot of that land could be used if cultivated correctly. also take for example an adult that replaces 4 meals a week that would consist of meat, and instead replace with veggies. that cuts fat and calories more than half! don't think doing that will change anything? ever heard about the soda diet where people replace soda with a calorie free drink for a month?! dramatic weight loss in some. limit meat consumption because it is wasteful and hazardous. these are just facts not opinion. facts are available to back this up. i look into it all the time for myself. also their waste is harmful because of breeding way to many cows because of supply and demand. sure cows have been @!$%#ting in fields for a long time, but never has there been so many cows on this large of scale for so long. this is because of supply and demand. and everyday citizens im talking about are people walking down the street. when you have a buisness that is different and the govt has the right to make sure you are operating in a legit manner. every restraunt i worked at had health inspections sometimes they wouldn't tell you they were comming. quit whinning. im sure the gov isn't going to care if they see you smoking weed in your backyard they just want to make sure you are running a clean ship. doesn't mean your not a human don't twist my words because that is what makes me think your a dumb redneck. not because you are a farmer although i would never understand someone who wants to kill animals for a living i think its gross but someone has to do it i guess.

over here in ca where i live (central valley) i actually know a lot more about this than some people on here. i literally live next to farms. on this news every year there are studies published about the environment and water supply of the valley. every year the same results but worse. water is tainted with trace chemicals that can be harmful after years of exposure. also the air quality is terrible for many reasons but one of the biggest being fertilizers, chemicals, and methane gas. this is scientific fact that all of these things are harmful after repeated exposure but the extent to how harmful is unknown. it is very scary. for these reasons i think we need to limit meat consumption. i just want to point out that i do feel bad for the pot growers however because they make a harmless product with no poison potential that for some reason the govt still feels is a danger to society. priorities?

SPYING??!! Not bloody likely!! It's tantamount to a drug maker claiming the FDA has no right to check on their drugs!!

Where there is smoke, there is fire and based upon the uprising in Nebraska (where nobody says they do anything wrong?), I have grave concerns over the farms being looked at.

They can look at my land anytime they want.. I have no problem with that. If you do, then YOU have the problem and YOU shouldn't worry (you never do anything wrong... right Nebraska?)!

It's not what the EPA is doing but how they're doing it period.

You do not have a right to pollute the watershed just because you have a farm or other agribusiness.

I am an ardent civil libertarian, but nobody has the right to put the lives of people who live downstream and those who get their water from wells drilled into aquifers, because of bacteria and other pollutants from their manure lagoons,just so they can make a larger profit. What happened to the GOP being the party of personal responsibility and ethics?

Ridiculous arguments. Federal, State and local agencies have been using fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters for nearly 40 years as a tool of law enforcement. "Eyes in the sky" are a vital and obvious tool for more effective and efficient oversight of large land areas; and we can only afford so many inspectors and cops on the beat.

The EPA is charged with upholding environmental laws to protect our environment, air and water, and for holding violators of those laws accountable. You don't get a free ride because you are a farmer or a rancher, or because your personal political point of view is that you should be able to do whatever you want to do and the government should butt out. Grow up people, and get over yourselves. You have to live by the same laws as everyone else, like it or not.

Hey, you violate environmental standards, you pay the price. Don't whine and hand-wring because you feel an agency is not playing fair ... because you get caught. Your intentions undermine your case. Suck it up and do the responsible thing.

You may own the land, but you do not own the environment, the air and the water you are poisoning.

It doesn't matter the reason, without a warrant this is illegal. Trying to justify this by saying the EPA is protecting the environment doesn't fly. This is spying on American citizens in the US, and in the US, you have to have a warrant. Why is this so hard to understand

It doesn't matter the reason, without a warrant this is illegal.

LMFAO, No it isn't.

Yes, it is

ashp- you are an idiot. Humans are omnivores not herbavores. How did I know you were from CA before you mentioned it. By the way, you may own the land but the airspace above is still property of the U.S. Government, like it or not.

homeland security?

When you own livestock, you are subject to having that area looked over to ensure the safety of the environment. If you decided to also colocate your home in this area, guess what is going to happen?? Why do people constantly confuse the rights of individuals, witht he rights of businesses? You do have rights as an individualy, but as soon as you become a farmer / business owner, then these activites warrent additional oversight to protect the rest of us from those people who don't want to invest in the proper infrastructure to contain their ecological risks which they are making money off of.

Spying on people from above is just one more way our already-too-powerful government is using fear to keep the populace in line. What will be next? Cameras in our bedrooms? Televisions that watch us?

Yes, law enforcement has used helis and fixed wings for years, and in some cases it's both justified and necessary. In the case of enforcing speed limits this is acceptable because it's over public property. If you're in public you may be observed. In the case of using aircraft to look for weed, that's looking for illegal materials in largely uninhabited areas, not spying on individuals. Also, there's a big difference between being out of regulatory compliance and growing an illegal substance.

My feeling is that if they want to overfly private property for the purposes of surveillance, then they should have a warrant to do so. Or don't be lazy, go inspect on the ground.

Anybody who doesn't get chills thinking about how arrogant and bold law enforcement has gotten, bullying and persecuting ordinary citizens, is nuts.

There's another story out today about how cops are trying to stop people from filming them, saying that's violating wiretapping laws. But they want to video ordinary citizens whenever, wherever they want. Double standard.

"Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." Anyone who took any kind of history class knows these words, but they get thrown around so much they have lost the meaning. The major players throwing these words around are generally liberals who use the words and twist them, granted not far, but twist them nevertheless, to state that everybody is equal in all respects.

The truth is everybody is NOT equal.

To certain rights, especially those granted by the Constitution, everyone is equal, yes, but when it comes to the details of living, everyone is not equal. So yes, the pot grower has the same right to not be spied on without a warrant as does the rancher, but the primary difference is the rancher is producing a product people need versus the pot grower where the product being produced is one people want (and truthfully for no reason other than they can't deal with their problems on their own merits and strengths).

So the truth is, while the EPA may have good intentions, so do other law enforcement who investigate suspected criminals and terrorists and do so without warrants, yet the same people who now cheer for the EPA will decry the actions of the other law enforcement. Why? Because the people they look up to decry these actions. So instead of thinking for themselves, they tout the party line because they think it is right.

Now I'll give people like ashp a couple things, most meat products are generally high on the scale of fattening substances and replacing meals of meat with meals of fruits and veggies would likely result in a healthier future. The problem with this line of thinking is the exact same as people like ashp keep touting: they are asking others to change their ways to suit their visions instead of letting others live their lives. And you'd still have the issue of pesticide runoff or whatever else it is that is complained about involving fruits and veggies.

ASHP - Who the hell gives you or Michelle Obama for that matter the right to decide what is eaten and how frequently?? Yes there is an obvious obesity problem in this country, BUT it is a matter of people over induldging, and beef has been a staple of the Human diet since before we figured out how to make fire. I will eat what I want as often as I want. I work out and keep myself in as good a shape as I can. This is from a guy that was "morbidly obese" 4 years ago, and have worked my butt off (quite literally) to lose 140 pounds nad keep it off.

As for the government flying over and taking pictures. There is a problem with that. If the EPA needs to check up on these people, drive down the driveway unannounced and do your thing. I assure you, once one of these ranchers daughters, say 13, appears in one of the flyover pictures sunbathing on her deck, and the Government gets sued for a few million, is that when they stop?

Lastly, beef comes from "Steers" and milk comes from "Cows".

For all you "progressives" laughing at the hypocrisy of conservatives caterwauling about this while supporting domestic spying, would I be correct to assume that you are against these EPA flyovers? If you do support them, why should the EPA be allowed to do these flyovers and not Homeland Security?

And what is so hard about getting a warrant beforehand?

Cops have been wondering around neighborhoods for centuries looking for crimes. I hear they even even have chopppers-- saw it on adam-12. ;) I'd be more surprised if the govt wasnt doing this.

"The same ends could be accomplished by picking up a phone, sending an email, talking to a producer in person," Kristen Hassebrook, the group's environmental affairs director, told msnbc.com.

<ring> <ring> Hello Mr. Smith, do you have any leaking manure ponds? "Nope" Ok have a nice day.

<reply to email> Nope, none

"Hello, mind if I take a walk around your property and check for pollution?" "No, you may not"

Tell me again, Mrs. Hassebrook, how overflights are the same as the options you gave.

This whole thing is hysterical. It is perfectly legal for law enforcement to fly over neighborhoods and look into people's backyards, and yes, take pictures if they want. This has been going for years. The EPA has been doing for the last 10 years. Why are the ranchers "all of a sudden" upset? For those people who say the EPA should get a warrant ... they can't without probable cause. The EPA is flying over because they are being cost effective. Don't we want that in the government? For those people who talk about marijuana only being used by people who "want" it. Try again, there are many people who need it for legitimate medical purposes. Please don't continue to believe the propaganda started by W.R. Herst.

I suggest you do a little research! This is very illegal.

I suggest you do a little research! This is very illegal.

How about you show me the specific law they are breaking. Show me where it says it's illegal to FLY over someone's property.

The Supreme court has held in two 1986 cases, the Dow Chemical Company v. United States, that the EPA flight with an aerial photographer was an "administrative" search and not subject to the search warrant requirements under the Fourth Amendment. The second case was a criminal case, CA v. Ciraolo, and the police flew a plane over a guy's backyard, at 1000ft, and found his marijuana plants. This was also not a "search" requiring a warrant. Currently there is NO requirement for a search warrant to conduct a "search" from the airspace....

Polluting the groundwaterisa not the "pursuit of happiness";rather it is the product of unhappiness.

Sorry rednecks and republican congressmen who want to stir up the rural vs washington emotions for their own promotion and maybe election time points, taking pictures from an airplane is not covered under illegal search law. See Justathought's post above. Think of all the airplanes and people take pictures from them all the time. I did when I was flying. Think of Google maps satellite pictures. I'm sure a few people got caught nude sun bathing in thier own yards. Could they protest on illegal search grounds? Not likely. The real issue is what the government or other law enforcement agency does with the info. If it builds a data base of information obtained incidentally, and then later decides that it shows something illegal, that should be banned. In other words if there is a law enforcement purpose it needs to be specific, if the information is to be kept. Like the data being accumilated on peoples positions via cell phones. As for just privacy forget it. I'd like to see a constitutional amendment making privacy a right but anyone trying to do it in this polarized political environment would just get hammered by the other side and blocked just because. And law enforcement would object as it would make prosecuting many types of crimes very difficult. We are in this mess because the privacy has taken a back seat to data collection and analysis, and new tools for communicating it. Maybe someday the fascination with technology will fade and we'll stop worrying what everyone else is doing privately--but we'll have to agree on a definition of privacy to even get started. The right wing worries too much about sex and drugs, to allow those things to happen in the name of privacy, which they will.

...on what authority EPA is flying over and photographing private property.

That would be the FAA's authority. Maybe as federal legislators they've heard of the Federal Aviation Administration? You know, the guys that set the rules and regulations for aircraft and airspace across the US?

If it's public airspace, [and most airspace is], and if it hasn't been closed or limited by the FAA for a specific safety or security reason, then the landowners have no right to object.

We all have a right to fly over them, and take all the pictures we wish. The EPA is simply representing public interests in this case. Police agencies, fire-spotters, search and rescue organizations, news organizations and others have been doing it for decades. It's legal.

Journal... then go there and monitor or inspect. DON'T serveille in the air.

hey that's too bad... illegal activity has no provisions for privacy. And the EPA has Federal jurisdiction which means "nationwide"

I would like to point out that business must be inspected on a regular basis to prevent damage to it's environment. Every business type be it growing food to banking, that includes every business. After all greed demands to get stuff done cheaper. Lets not forget what kind of damage it does to fish, and not just the fish in the local stream I'm talking about dead zones in the oceans where all this pollution combines with other imbeciles that are cheap bastards. http://www.treehugger.com/clean-technology/nasa-releases-new-map-of-aquatic-dead-zones.html

Gotta make sure those Republican ranchers aren't rigging cattle to explode so they can blame it on Obama. BWAHAHA

Cry babies are sickening when they are adults!!

If you have nothing to hide... Then just shut-up!

Are they also outraged at Google maps, MSN, NASA and Terraserver too, or just that the EPA that might catch them dumping pollutants into rivers and streams?

journal - Even small family farms have manure lagoons. I live in Amish country & all of the small Amish farms w/ cows have them.

PRober you are right, illeagal activity should have no privacy. What about the 85% of cattlemen that do it correctly. What about their provacy??

as with the way it is supposed to be in this country, "Innocent until proven guilty". Find some probable cause, by inspecting each individual ranch independently, find violations, get a warrant, and fly over all you want.

It is wrong and unconstitutional for our government to do this. If it gets there, this process will never, repeat NEVER stand up to the supreme Court and its constitutionality.

Neither is right.

Richard-

It is already done in your neighborhood if you live in a populated area. I don't believe the people objecting to ranch monitoring had any issues with aerial spying when it was used in South Florida or LA, for traffic enforcement, Homeland Security, DEA, or just general wide area monitoring.

It would cost quite a bit more to monitor on the ground. Environmental damage and even disasters have come from poorly managed farm operations. I think the EPA has a legal duty to do ongoing monitoring and this is by far the most cost effective way to do it. I'd rather the government do overflights rather than wandering my land, wouldn't you?

I don't how you take this as other than ranchers wanting a pass to pollute.

I live in farm country and strongly support responsible agriculture as practiced by most operations. I wouldn't want an unmonitored polluting factory upstream either, and I don't see how this is different.

-Don

don't believe the people objecting to ranch monitoring had any issues with aerial spying when it was used in South Florida or LA, for traffic enforcement, Homeland Security, DEA, or just general wide area monitoring.

I bet a lot of them did or would have a problem with it.

It's public airspace; owned and controlled by and for public and not private interests.

Anyone can fly over and take photos, not just government or law enforcement agencies. It's perfectly legal, just the same as if someone were driving by a house or business facing a public street, or public waterway. If you don't want passersby to see or photograph you or your property, put it all under a really really big tent, or find a legal means through the FAA to close the airspace to all aircraft, [ that last one is highly unlikely without a very strong public safety or national security rationale].

Otherwise, if you're in public view, you have willingly given up any expectation for privacy.

actually i believe it was ben franklin who said it first. But i do agree so did our founding fathers that spoke of a right and duty in the declaration of indepentance.

I don't believe that anybody who writes "Libs" in their posts ever gave a damn when the Patriot Act , FISA, Military Commissions Act, Telcom Immunity were overwhemingly passed by "Conservatives". In fact, the only folks screaming about that were Liberals. Like Sen Finegold, the only Patriot Patriotic enough to vote against the Patriot Act, a screaming Liberal. And I bet your old enough to remember the FBI infiltrating every left leaning organization in the US and you didn't give a damn then either. But when an organization that you probably despise, the EPA, picks on a bunch of tax subsidied ranchers you get your panties all in a wad. Naw, hypocrisy is folks like you saying NOTHING back then. The EPA has been doing this for 11 years. 2001 Patriot Act +11 = now. You brought this on yourself. Suck it up. Buck up and admit it.

Ka-Ching! Arsenic nails it!

Some of us were kicking and screaming. Arsernic valid points; The best way to protect your freedoms and civil liberties is to start by standing up for someone else's.

Perhaps "spying" isn't exactly the right word, but "surveilling" sure as hell is.

When you incorporate and run a business, your business ceases being a private entity. If you want privacy as an individual, then don't live at your work. It seems like a simple concept!!

As a follow up: peopleforget theEPA is a creature of Richard nixonand Gerald ford.It was streghted by Regan anong others. It['s hard for consevative to argue agisnt their owndevices. They have no problem with snoopmg on everyone Library card-why whine about this?

Claire.. would you mind if while walking down the street, minding your own business, and a Police Officer told you to get up against the wall, and submit to being frisked?

I ask as they CAN do that in NYC now.

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

Benjamin Franklin

These are some powerful words to remember and live by.

Claire - Newsflash! If they have enough cattle to need a lagoon for the manure, they are not going to be able to hide that just because they get a call that warns them the EPA is coming. Trust me, the EPA could get there faster than they could flush away the evidence.

Claire, a one day heads up phone call that someone is coming to your ranch for an inspection is not enough time to fix a problem that would constitute an EPA violation. Basically the phone call is just for permission to be there and take the necessary pictures.

How about a one day warning that the flyover was to occur? No Fault, no problem.

How hard would it be to generate an email to registered farmers/ranchers?? Seems to be that if no shortcomings are going on, the heads up should be enough. Otherwise, stop ALL surveillance of Americans without a Court Order and Probable Cause proven.

Peace

Hey Mom of two, Annie, Xdm. Some kind of environmental expert? Methinks not. CAFO's violate the law every day in every state. There are more violations than you can shake a stick at. Never saw the videos of bulldozing downer cows into pits by creeks? Nobody needs permission to photograph you anymore, look at your house with thermal imaging that can see through walols, listen to you remotely, tap all your calls and email, hold you incummicado for as long as they want in a military prison, or assainate you for suspision of conspiracy.

Conservatives did that.

You did that.

Liberals fight that.

If there is one thing a Teatard can be relied upon to do, is get it backwards.

Arsenic - you don't know me, so I will forgive you (if I am interpreting your post correctly) for calling me a conservative or a tea party republican. I am neither. I have no party affiliation, I am more than willing to equally slam both political sides if I disagree with them. Not a conservative, not a liberal, not a Democrat, not a Republican. Have never and will never toe (or vote) a party line. Drove my dad (God rest his soul) nuts because I was the only one in the family not voting a "straight ticket."

Annie, I'm in the same boat as you. However, I will maintain that there are certain rules that must be followed by anyone in this country. If you want to have livestock, you are then subject to be looked at for pollution caused by your livestock. This should be an assumed risk, and is not the same as being an individual public citizen walking down the street, or someone who lives in a house in a subdivision. It seems that people want to make all things equal, when they are not. Running a farm puts you into a different catagory which includes unscheduled checks from the air. It's not spying on ordinary citizens, rather compliance for those who own livestock!

no loose canon, wrong again... businesses have to abide by the laws of the land. Just like you and me

No PRober your wrong. They simply pack up and go to places like China and India that don't strangle them with regulations that are ridiculous and then import the products back to the US for huge profits.

I'm not saying that the EPA is not warranted but when 90% of the fines place on companies are for stupid paperwork errors, and when you ask the EPA for guidance, all you get is the standard, "We are here for enforcement not guidance" speech. No wonder this country if failing.

This is a very troubling and invasive issue which President Obama signed into law. He has a lot of W in his decisions, but we do know the President is not the one running the show in regards to these 'matters'.

And so who set up all these erosions of our freedoms in the recent past. Conservatives or Liberals? There really isn't any shade of gray there, is there?

Sounds like GITMO.

I'll agree with the first part. And I'll agree to legalizing pot..... when they get an instant test like a breathalyzer if one is caught driving uner the influence.

9mm,

fair enough to me. And you are very right about what is slowly coming down around us without anyone really paying attention. They will, when it's too late. I doubt if it could be avoided. The tech is there, the desire for total power and control is there, and the ability to hide what they're up to is there. And of course, Americans are known world wide for their naitivity. We were spoon-fed "that happens over there, not here".

The problem with the 'when a potolyzer is invented' argument is that Natural(herb) vs Chemically-Derived(amost every other drug, especially Big Pharma-produced) testable compounds have benchmarks which to measure against.

Weed really doesn't, except for the abused test which shows a presence, not an amount or time-of-use clock. Fat-soluble takes 3-4 weeks to leave the system, but you can get drunk and coked up two nights earlier and pass most any drug test they throw at ya.

But as far as privacy goes, that's shot out the window at this juncture.

Peace

Which is really too bad.

Why is everyone so willing to give up their rights?

I will never understand it.

The drug war is nothing more than a government tax on the people.

9MM

Don't forget an instant test for all the prescription drugs.

Flying over somebody's land and filming it has nothing to do with Liberty!!

I have the liberty to film anybodies land I want and if the Fed's think there is a problem,... GO WITH IT, ESPECIALLY IF THEY COMPLAIN!!!

Obviously there is a problem with farmers and being transparent in your efforts!

what -

2010 - 10 + 2000. Or did you mean, 2012 - 10 + 2002?

2010 - 10 = 2002.

Lost me,

I thought 2010-10 = 2000, but I did go to public school.

2010 - 10 is 2000. Try it on your calculator if you can't count on your fingers. Wasn't Clinton still president in 2000? Is that who you mean?

your name matches your math capabilities..... lol

or maybe I was taught math wrong all these years....

Bull@!$%#.

Well, if you and I sat down and talked about it, then decided a revolution is in order (and taking no further action!). We could be arrested, stripped of our citizenship and sent to gitmo for the rest of our lives. All this courtesy of recent legislation passed by both houses and signed by the president.

For starters, I don't have any kids. It would be unfair to them to put them in a surveillance society.

Kevin, I believe you would be referring to Obama signing an extension of the policy of indefinite detention established under Bush and two GOP-controlled Congressional Houses.

None of that stuff you're referring to is 'recent' legislation.

This kinda crap is why many progressives are getting as fed up with Barack as the conservatives were before he even took the oath. He's a wimp about standing up to the police state/military-industrial complex, or standing up for progressive ideas of any kind. He's less liberal than Eisenhower or Nixon to be honest. Unfortunately, Mittens I'm sure outright loves the MIC ... frankly when I look at him all I can see is mushroom clouds behind his head.

Or the surveilance cameras that have appeared at all signaled intersections in our county over the last two years...and NO they are not "traffic enforcement" cameras. Those stand out like sore thumbs, these are small "black globes" like in Walmart or any other Big box ceiling.

Just so I'm clear: are you for EPA aerial surveillance or against it?